Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Study: (Perhaps) Honey isn’t as healthy as we think [View all]Greybnk48
(10,203 posts)9. One occurs in nature and HFCS does not.
I'm sure they both cause similar blood sugar spikes, of course, but I don't believe the physiological effects are identical. I'll continue to ban HFCS and restrict honey for health reasons.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
145 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Yes, but local honey is effective for helping mitigate pollen based allergies, and studies have
peacebird
Sep 2015
#1
not true. but it has to be LOCAL honey. when i visited texas. the honey i used for milwaukee only
pansypoo53219
Sep 2015
#36
Perhaps that's why our local honey DOES work for us. It is raw, unprocessed, straight from our hives
peacebird
Sep 2015
#40
Do you work for pharma? Look, we use honey, herbs, exercise and organic foods. We no longer need
peacebird
Sep 2015
#119
Anecdotally local honey has worked for our family. We no longer need allergy meds.
peacebird
Sep 2015
#39
Did I say there was scientific basis, no. i said it has worked for us. Snark much?
peacebird
Sep 2015
#118
You have to make sure that your beliefs are safe from evidence-based challenges!
HuckleB
Sep 2015
#130
It is processed - pre-digested - by the bees. I understood it to be a very high glycemic index food.
RadiationTherapy
Sep 2015
#7
Correct. What we are talking about an appeal to nature fallacy and As is natural and disproves it nt
LostOne4Ever
Sep 2015
#72
The post that spawned this subthread was giving a counter example to the appeal to nature fallacy
LostOne4Ever
Sep 2015
#76
Except that no one is claiming that everything that occurs in nature should be eaten
villager
Sep 2015
#78
What industrial/corporate food products -- or their attendant pesticides, antibiotics, etc.
villager
Sep 2015
#82
Ah, so there's never any conflict of interest, or looking-the-other-way at the FDA.
villager
Sep 2015
#87
I'm responding at the same level as the poster who thinks 'natural food' = good!
X_Digger
Sep 2015
#24
Another one in regards to insulin response, is bottle down agave touted as a natural
Person 2713
Sep 2015
#15
And yet whether you know it or not you're getting pretty much the same thing
Major Nikon
Sep 2015
#97
I just posted this but yours is much more informative. I will delete mine.
Hollingsworth
Sep 2015
#32
Makes sense. Sugar is sugar. The problem with HFCS is that it's in so many things.
Marr
Sep 2015
#57
Y'all go right on ahead and eat your poison, and I'll stick with my natural diet that has
Zorra
Sep 2015
#63
I suspect the reward is countering the irrational nonsense of people who call things "poison"
Major Nikon
Sep 2015
#95
Seriously, you think people are going to switch from honey to HFCS? bwahahahaha!
djean111
Sep 2015
#89
There is sucrose for energy. No vitamins, no minerals, nothing that cannot be gotten from
djean111
Sep 2015
#126
Carbohydrates are a macronutrient and half to most of your calories should come from them
Major Nikon
Sep 2015
#128
I am almost 70, extremely active. Lately, been walking to the grocery store, almost three miles
djean111
Sep 2015
#129